TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Alternatives to numbering, take II From:Peter <pnewman1 -at- HOME -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 9 Aug 1999 16:43:50 -0400
I may be missing something. But why can't one just call each section
"Article 1" "Chapter 2" "Section A" where the words "Article" "Chapter"
and "Section" are part of the referenced hierachial numbering scheme.
This would avoid the need to use 1.2.3 & 1.1.1.2, etc. I have done this
several times in the past.
Peter
Geoff Hart wrote:
>
>snip>
> The way you work around this problem is by flattening the
> hierarchy wherever possible. For example, instead of having
> one main heading entitled "10. Printing", with two subheads
> ("10.1 locally" and "10.2 over the Internet") that each have
> several levels of subheadings, create two new main headings
> ("10. Printing locally" and "11. Printing over the Internet"). In
> fact, depending on how large the text is for these sections,
> you might even turn each one into its own chapter. By doing
> so, you've eliminated one whole level of heading (thereby
> making the context clearer), grouped the information into
> more digestible chunks, and mitigated to some extent the
> potential impact (fear of complexity) of four-digit or larger
> section numbers.
